linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 0/3] Maintainer Entry Profiles

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 13 Sep 2019 16:17:31 -0300
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        ksummit <ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Steve French <stfrench@...rosoft.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 0/3] Maintainer Entry Profiles

Em Fri, 13 Sep 2019 11:42:38 -0700
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> escreveu:

> On Fri, 2019-09-13 at 15:26 +0100, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 3:12 PM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:  
> > > On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 13:01 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > >   
> > > > Another argument in favor of W=1 is that the formatting of kernel-doc
> > > > headers is checked only if W=1 is passed to make.  
> > > 
> > > Actually, but for the fact there are far too many
> > > to generally enable that warning right now,
> > > (an x86-64 defconfig has more than 1000)
> > > that sounds pretty reasonable to me.  
> 
> > It's in the 1000s on arm because W=1 turns on more checks in building
> > .dts files. There are lots of duplicates as most of the dts content is
> > as an include file (e.g. board dts includes soc dts).  
> 
> Yeah, dts[i] files in arm compilations are very noisy at W=1
> so moving those message types to W=2 seems sensible.
> 
> $ { opt="ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=arm-unknown-linux-gnueabi-" ; make $opt clean ; make $opt defconfig ; make $opt W=1 -j4 ; } > arm_make.log 2>&1
> 
> $ grep -i -P 'dtsi?:.*warning' arm_make.log | wc -l
> 69164

Yeah, makes sense moving them to W=2, or to make them somehow produce
less noise.

> Just fyi:  for an x86-64 defconfig with gcc 8.3
> 
> $ { make clean ; make defconfig ; make -j4 W=1 ; } > make.log 2>&1
> 
> There are ~300 W=1 for non kernel-doc -W<foo> warnings.
> 
> $ grep -i -P -oh '\[\-W[\w\-]+\]' make.log |sort | uniq -c | sort -rn
>     163 [-Wmissing-prototypes]
>      69 [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
>      16 [-Wempty-body]
>      10 [-Wtype-limits]
>       6 [-Woverride-init]
>       2 [-Wstringop-truncation]
>       2 [-Wcast-function-type]
>       1 [-Wunused-but-set-parameter]

On my eyes, it doesn't sound too much. I suspect that, 
with gcc-9, it should produce more warnings, though.

Perhaps we could "promote" most of those to W=0.

> 
> And there are ~1000 kernel-doc only messages in various files

A significant amount of those warnings appear with "make htmldocs".

Not having the kernel-doc warning as part of W=0 helps to make
very hard to have them cleared.

IMHO, those should be enabled by default with W=0, at least for the
files that are included on some kernel-doc tag.

I mean, perhaps, when W=0, Kernel build could run:

	$ ./scripts/kernel-doc -none $(git grep kernel-doc:: Documentation/|cut -d: -f4-|sort|uniq|grep -vE "\bsource\b")

That produces 165 warnings (against v5.3-rc4 + media -next patches).

Thanks,
Mauro